There has been much skuddlebutt about who wants to do what to/for seniors...so where are the views of the 2 parties and the candidates? Glad you asked:

1. Maintain Medicare's free preventive services:

Because of the passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, Medicare patients now receive many screenings and an annual "Wellness visit"(although you must use this terminology when making your appointment with your doctor). Seniors also receive cancer screenings and other disease prevention services with no copays.

Obama supports this, Romney wants to terminate this care

2. Continue closing the Medicare part D "donut hole".

First, for people who haven't dealt with this, this is how the donut hole worked prior to the ACA(Obamacare): Senior prescriptions were covered until they got up to $2750...then, even tho seniors were still paying the drug insurance premium, they were responsible for prescription costs up to $4500, then Part D would kick in again. This may not sound like much...except I know that one of my prescriptions, without my insurance, costs about $400, and I have 2 more that add up to $400...this is per month( I have insurance and I only pay a co-pay)...and these are for asthma, blood-pressure, not some rare disease. So it'd only take maybe 3 months for part D to throw me in the donut hole, not too much help.

In the ACA, the "donut hole" has already been cut in half and will be closed by 2020 and this affects over 4 million seniors!

Obama, obviously, supports this. Romney? Nope, let those seniors pay the high prices.Can't afford it, get a job.

3. Stop waste, fraud, abuse in Medicare:

The ACA puts laws in place that ends subsidies for insurance companies, tracking down fraudulent providers who either overcharge or try to swindle Medicare. Just this piece of the legislation is predicted to add about 10 years to Medicare Solvency! In one Fiscal Year alone, this act saved over $4 Billion in fraud and overcharges. 

And yes, again, Obama supports this, but Romney doesn't....

So is there anything that Romney supports? Oh, sure.....

4. Raise the Retirement age:

Romney, Ryan and many of the republicon congress support a requirement for all Americans to work to age 69 or 70 before being able to collect full Social Security earned benefits and not receive Medicare until 67. You betcha Romney supports this(and President Obama opposes).

This has been an ongoing march because, we all know that people are living longer! I mean our basic mortality is now in the 80's so we should be able to work longer! Another lie. 

Our life span has not been lengthen because all of us are getting old..remember, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin and many other of the fore-fathers lived well into their 70's and 80's. The difference is that infant, child, women of child-bearing age was much lower until the 1950's or so. In the 1930's our life expectancy was about 58, its now 77. BUT the difference in infant mortality? In 1935, the infant mortality rate was 56.7 per 1000 live births. In 2009? It was only 6.7 deaths per 1000 live births. Just that fact skewers the idea that Americans are living so much longer....no, its just that many more people are making it through childhood!

The other fact that is not included in this factoid is there is a big difference on who can work until old age. Look at the Supreme Court! I'm sure their average age is about 65! This works well for people who have worked in higher income workplaces. But for the working poor? Those people who serve you at diners, work fast food, retail(yes, I'm really thinking about mallwart here), middle class workers such as police, firefighters, trades--all of these people are at risk of shorter life spans.

Again, Romney is just fine with people working until they die. President Obama opposes this.

5. Medicare Coupons..or the Ryan plan of Medicare vouchers.

We already know who's plan this is....So Romney/Ryan/Republicons want to end Medicare and give Seniors a voucher of about $7000 to "shop" for health care insurance. Now, any senior that has to search through Part D plans or Medicare Advantage plans knows how difficult and aggravating that is. And the triple R's want you to do that with insurance companies...why not just farm it out to Groupon like a spa coupon? I can see the email:

"Hurry for your chance at this medicare groupon discount!!! Our program ensures you'll get some care...just don't be very ill cuz it doesn't cover cancer, transplants, heart disease...or anything else that may be considered too expensive for our partners to be able to make any money!"

Add to this, their idea of repealing the ACA and losing the savings that Medicare has seen since 2010 and that spells financial ruin for many middle class seniors.

This is one of the Romney/Ryan's great plan, Romney has called Ryan's budget, "Marvelous"...President Obama Opposes.

6. Block-Grant Medicaid and reduce funding.

Why should seniors worry about Medicaid? That's for poor people. Sorry, but one of the largest uses of Medicaid funds is for Nursing homes for middle class seniors. The House budget committee would cut funding by $800 Billion and allow states to spend the remaining funds any way they want.

Romney, of course, supports this. President Obama opposes.

Romney doesn't care about seniors who aren't as rich as he, and before you go to the polls, you need to know this. If you are a senior and vote for Romney and the other R Politicos, you are, in all probability, affecting your ability to live safely and securely with the knowledge that your health care is covered...and again....

Mr. Romney where are your TAX RECORDS!!!!!

WHAT ARE YOU HIDING!!!

Republicons and their hatred of women...or is it just Uppity Women?

Since spring, the Republicons have had their foot in their mouth over women and women's rights--employment, health, reproductive, birth control, and what is actually a "legitimate" rape, now, even how some girls "rape easy":
We have Congressman Todd Akin who is now trying to be a senator, saying that women who get raped can't get pregnant cuz their body shuts down the lady parts...or some drivel like that; and when he tried to walk back from that statement, he brought up the idea that the lady parts fizzle only works if its a "legitimate" rape....sure....and the republicons think this guy is smart enough to be a Senator??? Really??? 
Of course, there is also  Rep. Roscoe Bartlett(R-MD) who stated that there are very few women who ever get pregnant from rape and he thinks that one of the main causes for abortion is the baby is the wrong gender or the woman just doesn't want to be bothered. 
And the illustrious boy VP candidate, who has co-sponsored "personhood" bills with Aiken, endorsed(and now undendorsed) the state senator that feels some girls are just easy rapes, has compared a woman getting pregnant through rape to "just another form of conception".
There's been Rep. Tom Smith, another one running for a senate seat, this time in Pennsylvania who compared rape to an out-of-wedlock pregnancy, but these are the ones that are crazy enough to make it to national tv and many of these have been kind of swept under the rug as just some of the more extreme views....pay no attention, dear women voters...we're not really that far out. We'll not take away your rights...well. only the ones we don't agree with.
But...then...look at what many of the state legislatures have been busy with: personhood bills(these not only attack abortion rights, but also birth control and in-vitro fertilization); when there is a referendum on ballots about personhood, its voted down by a large margin, but when taken up in the state assemblies? It is usually passes at least one house...and usually by men, republicon men. Doing just what the republicon platform states.
And now, the piece de resistance? Wannabe senator Murdoch. Mr. Murdoch, when asked about abortion said that he would not support any law that allowed for an abortion due to the woman being raped...violated...attacked...one of the worst things that can ever happen to you without you dying, although there are enough women who commit suicide after a rape.
Now, does a suicide have much to do with a pregnancy, one of "god's will" as Mr. Murdoch puts it? Only if you want to know what the woman may be going through as a human being.
The 2012 Republican platform did address these issues by inserting them into the platform:
"We assert the sanctity of human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed."
Of course that "sanctity of life" ends when the baby is born....

And, again, Where are Mitt's tax returns?????

Tell me again how the Republicons aren't racist

Tuesday night, 2 GOP delegates were thrown out of the RNC convention because of their actions: They threw peanuts at an African American camera woman(who works for CNN) saying, "This is how we feed the animals!" Yes, they were escorted out and banned, but in what century would normal people think this was something to say or do? Or appropriate? Only in a time that it was fine to think less of people that were different than you and you knew that the people around you wouldn't be bothered by heinous behavior. But, if we look at the republican platform, it has dropped to the lowest common denominator of hatred, or at least oppression of others. Not only does the platform scream, "OPPRESSION!", but the candidates do also. Mitt Romney loves to repeat the lie that President Obama has cut the welfare to work rule when in actuality he did what many Republicon governors(including Romney) wanted: instead of the federal government telling the states how to use the funds, the federal government gives the states block grants and the state decides how to use the funds. But we all know that its Obama kowtowing to his "base"...too bad that most Americans don't know that 60% of the people who use forms of welfare are white! He's played the "birther" card in Michigan and loves using the adjective "angry" when speaking about President Obama--haven't figured out where he sees "anger"...must be when President Obama is singing or joking...its not like Mitt knows how normal people act. But even before Mitt was the frontrunner, we had these soundbytes: Gingrich quoted about the "food stamp president"(again, more whites than blacks use food stamps) and taking poor urban kids out of school and making them clean the bathrooms(there are more poor rural white kids than black) Who can forget Santorum's "blah" remark? "I don't want to make black people's lives better by giving them somebody else's money." How about Ron Paul arguing that the legislation outlawing Jim Crow laws was a moral evil and violated white people's liberty? I'm sure there's nothing racist in that rant. Oh, and let's not forget Michelle Bachman waxing nostalgic and saying that Black families were stronger when enslaved than now(sure, loved to see their children sold off). But, another very thinly veiled remark is Romney's "Keep America, America", a play on the Ku Klux Klan's slogan, "Keep America American", although I doubt they were taling about Native Americans. Do you mean to say that the RNC or the Romney campaign weren't aware of the similarity? No one brought it up to them? I doubt that. Now, am I saying that all republicans are racist? No. But I am saying is the Southern Strategy is alive and well in the RNC and they will prey on the fears and ignorance of their base. It's been used since Nixon and Reagan probably used it best, first by announcing his run in Philidelphia MS to making up the lie of the "welfare queen". I guess the only good thing about this is that, for the most part, this is probably the last election this will work. Most polls show that many more people have less disparate views on race and the larger amount of racists are dying off and are not being replaced.  Hopefully we can keep history from being taken over by the right wing as they've tried(and are doing a pretty good job in places like Texas) and ensure that President Obama is reelected. Otherwise, I'm not so sure we can keep our history and our country on an honest path...specially if the guy who refuses to show us the same respect all other candidates have and release his tax records. Mitt--show us your tax records!

My letter to the editors--now, if it gets posted....

I sent this letter to different newspapers: The Sun-Times, the Trib(HAH!), Daily Herald, Springfield and my little DG paper. Let's see who posts it!

I am a state retiree, one of the "regulars", whose pension averages around $25,000 a year. I'm somewhat luckier than over 75% of my fellow retirees because I can collect Social Security, yes, that's right. Over 75% of state retirees do NOT collect Social Security--all they have is their pension.
I worked for the Department of Corrections for about 30 years, over 2/3 of that time at Stateville, not what I would consider a "cushy" job. But we, that worked there, felt that we made a difference, we were to be firm, fair and consistent with inmates, we dealt with their families and with the public. I had worked my way from the young woman who had a low paying clerical job, to a correctional officer and then counselor. I could take care of my family and I paid taxes. I never made 6 figures at the job...not even close, but I knew I would be secure in my retirement because we had a contract, we had a pension and I kept my part of the deal and I paid my 8 - 9% of my pension cost every paycheck...but the state(and the people of Illinois) don't care and don't want to live up to their side of the deal. It's not that Illinois is spend drunk. In fact, we're 47th in revenue spending and 50th in state employee per citizen capita in the United States. What we are, is tax-phobic.
Not that the state doesn't make deals--over 2/3 of the state based corporations in Illinois pay NO state income tax and/or sales tax! We allow corporations to take many of the same deductions  that the Federal tax system uses, but on our flat income tax, those deductions are destructive to our financial situation and a majority of states have dropped these deductions.
Ways to raise revenue? First, we need to get rid of the Single Sales Factor--this alone costs us about $600 Million just from Caterpillar annually!  Drop the federal accelerated depreciation and go back to normal depreciation rates(would bring in about $300M annually), a deduction that allows no tax on dividends paid by foreign corporations to US parent corporations in Illinois(gain $400M annually). Getting rid of the Retailer's Discount on Sales Tax, at least for large retailers--Walmart keeps about $9 million annually of what we Illinois citizens think we're paying in sales tax! Like the Waltons need that money more than our citizens. That would bring in another couple hundred million annually.
And before all of the "OH NO, The nice corporations would LEAVE if we make them pay their FAIR SHARE!!!!" If Illinois tax structure was the same as Iowa's, we'd raise $6 billion more in revenue every year...Wisconsin's?  We'd raise about $9 billion more. Illinois taxes are not overtly high, that's just the sound byte.
I'm tired of seeing how my finances could be ruined over time while CME, Sears, Motorolla, United, Boeing, Caterpillar pay less in taxes than the average Illinois citizen. Its time to see the real problem, and its with the ones that control what's seen on TV and what stories get printed in the paper, not the 70 year old teacher living on your street--she deserves her pension, she worked for it, as we all have. And we demand to be respected. We're not demanding 6 or 7 figure pensions as some of our pols get. We want what we negotiated--a livable pension, nothing more and certainly nothing less.

Bigotty Chicken, but THEY'RE being persecuted?!?!?!?

I'm sure most have heard the "controversy" that is brewing about Chick fil a fast food. But now, the xtian hysteria squad have taken it on as their next crusade...
To begin with, Bigotty Chicken's(much easier to spell) pres. Dan Cathy stated that he believed in only heterosexual marriage and that his company was founded on "biblical principles". Now, if that was the end, there may have been a bit of a backlash, but that's not all Cathy has done with his business...he's also donated millions of $$(company profits, of course) to homophobic "charities" and sites. So, some people were mad, some prolly said things they shouldn't have, but....
Then the Muppets left! Now, Lisa Henson issued a statement on FaceBook: 

• "The Jim Henson Company has celebrated and embraced diversity and inclusiveness for over 50 years and we have notified Chick-fil-a that we do not wish to partner with them on any future endeavors".

I think that was very professional, just a difference of values, the Muppets want all people to treated fairly and they would donate any money they made through Bigotty Chicken to GLAAD...and what did Bigotty Chicken do? Act Christian? Nope...they lied and said the toys were being terminated due to "safety issues"....safety issues???? SAFETY ISSUES????? What? Were they worried that the toys were put together by gay guys???? And, really...hadn't any of them watched Sesame Street? Bert and Ernie???? Well, I guess that shows that lying is just fine by Bigotty Chicken. I always thought that Thou shalt not Lie was part of the commandments....must not be one of the Biblical values they care about, eh?
And now we have huckabee squirrel and Caribou Barbie getting some more seconds of fame by chirping in---huck with a Bigotty Chicken day and Caribou Barbie with her hands full of bigotty bags and expounding on how good it is to have a company that believes in the bible....and how they believe in the bible...and of course, the fundies are out in droves because, as they see(or hear it), their religion is getting persecuted again(yawn)...and they must defend!
I would just like to know how being a bigot and being called on it is considered religious persecution? Yes, there is fall back on Bigotty Chicken, they will lose some customers, but that's the downside of free speech, not religious persecution. No one was threatening to burn the bigotty chicken church, just not eat their food. Is the idea of critical thinking so foreign to fundies that they can't see anything outside of their religious bubble? OK, so that really doesn't need an answer.
But then there's another part of the Bigotty Chicken story. Seems that they've had other "biblical" revelations with employees...
In 2002, Bigotty Chicken settled a lawsuit with a manager they had fired due to him not praying to Jesus at a training seminar. He's Muslim--so...the first amendment only protects Bigotty's rights to be free from religious persecution and, in fact, allows them to persecute others?
And right now, there is a woman who has filed a lawsuit, stating that she was fired because the manager decided she should be a stay at home mother....and replaced her with a man. Up until this time, her job performance was rated as satisfactory or higher....so, gender discrimination is just part of Bigotty's religious rights????
Yes, that's only two claims, but usually, when dealing with fast food places, most people don't have the time or money to file suits...many more around, just not filed.
And why is it that its just find for the Million Mom March(or 20 people with computers) can demand a boycott on JC Penney's for having Ellen DeGeneres advertise their products, but its not OK for liberal folk to boycott Bigotty Chicken? Oh, again, I guess its that Constitution that they feel only covers them...
What is ironic is that although there were a couple of politicians who came out about refusing to allow Bigotty Chicken in, they've all apologized and said that they didn't mean they'd discriminate...after the ACLU and Mother Jone's mag came out telling them they were wrong, that was illegal, but Bigotty Chicken is still playing the poor me card.
Me? I've only been at Chic-fil-a once and found the place a bit horrifying...very loud music--xtian metal--screaming about eating the body and blood of Christ...right as I took a bite out of an overcooked, only warm sandwich....I decided right there I was never going back. Church's and Popeye's have much better food and I'm not forced to have my eardrums blown out about somebody else's sick fairy tales. See, I can do that, I don't have to eat or spend my money at places I feel aren't worth it...and that's all a boycott is sayin'.
Peace.

So-call Physician Group Created By Conspiracy Teabagger

So many silly crazy lies. I did an article on the ACA decision and some guy quoted this so-called physician groups "survey" as truth from god...small g....but, surprises of surprises? This "group" is just another right wing front that tries to legitimize crazy ideas--all vaccines are bad, blames immigrants for spreading leprosy(actually its been proven to be armadillos), that Hillary Clinton killed Vince Foster, besides other crackpot conspiracy theories....so, this "group" "surveys"  by sending out online and FAXes to 17,000 doctors...a whole 699 responded:

The survey was conducted by fax and online from April 18 to May 22, 2012. DPMAF obtained the office fax numbers of 36,000 doctors in active clinical practice, and 16,227 faxes were successfully delivered. Doctors were asked to return their completed surveys by fax, or online at a web address included in the faxed copy. Browser rules prevented doctors from filing duplicate surveys, and respondents were asked to provide personal identification for verification. The response rate was 4.3% for a total of 699 completed surveys.

Wow...less than 5%(and actually about 2.5% from the original pool) even bothered to respond, now, anyone who has done reputable surveys/polls or taken statistics would expect a larger amount of the respondents to answer...otherwise, throw out the poll and begin again, must be something wrong with it. Oh, but I did put in that nasty librul word---reputable.

Now, this has been zipping around the right wing alterworld that this is FACT--83% of doctors(that actually bothered to fill this out) are thinking about quitting medicine because of current changes in medical system!!! OK, so what part of the medical system? Ryan's plan to kill Medicare? Obamacare? Changes in technology? Changes in local regulations? See, it's not spelled as it would be in a reputable out so what were these doctors actually answering? And why do they only get 2 choices(plus unsure)? Professional pollsters gauge using a 5 point system which is the standard.

Another point that it might just be a junk poll? Brietbart, Drudge, Daily Caller and Faux news are the only ones that are jumping up and down about this--not CNN(Fox Lite), not ABC,NBC or CBS, all of which have taken up other talking points from the those sites in the past.

I really think its sad that people can be fooled by this crap, but when you don't check sources...or don't either have the knowledge or education to understand the basics about poll taking and sources(and most of the rest of the real world), its easy to understand how it happens, specially when many of the ones that follow Faux, etc. are older, less educated, fearful, people who prefer similar rather than diverse experiences, and/or have very little knowledge about how the United States was formed('cept for the canned versions)...its not surprising. Sad, but not surprising.

Presenting Willard "Mitt" Romney--the Human Windsock

First, where did "Mitt" come from? Is it a family nickname? Why Mitt? Its not a shortened version of his real name, not a nickname for some physical reason(i.e., I'm a redhead, I've been called "Red", not much cuz I hated it, but I have), can't see him playing baseball(baseball "mitt"--yes, I'm really stretching with that one)...strange..anyway enough random musings.....
Willard is not what you'd call...umm....stalwart. In fact, he changes his opinions/views more often than most people change their underwear(and I'm not talking about magic underwear either!). Need examples? I thought you'd never ask:

Immigration

• 2006:  Willard supported a plan that would help undocumented workers legal status and, in some cases, a path to citizenship. 
• 2007:  Nope, no citizenship, secure the border, employment verification(this was before the 2008 run)
• 2012:  Make it so miserable that they "self deport"....

Bush's Tax Cuts

• 2003:  he refused to take a position
• 2007:  He supported them(again, this was before the 2008 run)

Reagan fan?

• 1994:  when running against Ted Kennedy for Senate, he stated that he was an independent during the Reagan years, and he's, "not trying to return to Reagan-Bush" politics.
• 2005:  "Ronald Reagan is one of my heroes"

Gun Control

• 1994 -- He was for gun control and supported banning assault weapons and the Brady Bill.
• 2007? He joined NRA and wanted their endorsement.

Does he own guns?

• 1/10/07: "I have a gun of my own and I go hunting"
• 1/14/07: When asked if he owned a gun, he said no, but his son Josh did and they would use his.
• In 36 hours, Willard changed his mind about the "mandate" decision from...4 days and FLIP FLOP(aka-lying).

Climate Change

• 2003: Williard believed that the scientists had it right, that we needed to do something so as to keep the earth "safe"(my word, not his)
• 2007: Guess what? He said in 2007 that the "scientists hadn't completely resolved".

DADT

• 1994: Agreed with the policy as being the first step to gays and lesbians to openly defend their country
• 2007: Thought it was a "silly catch phrase", but the policy is fine the way it is and nothing has to be changed.

Gay Marriage

• 2002: Did not support DOMA or a constitutional amendment 
• 2008: Supported a gay marriage ban referendum in Massachusetts(even tho he also was the governor when MA legalized gay marriage).

Embryonic Stem cell research

• 2002:  Supported stem cell research while running for governor
• 2006:  Vowed to press for legislation to criminalize stem cell research.

Pro Choice? Anti Abortion? Depends on the year.

• 1994:  Romney stated he was more pro choice than Ted Kennedy, due to a relative dying from an illegal abortion.
• 1999:  When he went to Utah, this changed to "I refuse to accept either label" 
• 2002:  SPLASH! Running for Governor, he's back to supporting a woman's right to choose again.
• 2007:  SPLISH!  Now running for pres(1st time) and he's against abortion AGAIN.

Last but not even close to least-Obamney Care...AKA the state(MA) vs Federal Affordable Care Act(all in less the 2 days)

• Its a tax, (when the decision came down and on the campaign trail)
• It's not a tax, (when his communications director, Eric Fehrnstrom said it was a penalty on TV)
• It is a tax, (when WSJ editorialized on Willard throwing the RNC under the bus), but it was a penalty when he did it, and...
• Although he sides with the minority, he agrees with the majority of the court? Huh????

So, that's some of "cheek turning"...or whiplash of views/opinions that Willard has stated. Me? I'm just very dizzy just trying to type all of this! 
Happy weekend and remember, the reason we have weekends/days off is because of unions, not because of people like Willard "Mitt" Romney.